Related Links

More Information

Looking in versus looking out

Robert ZulloCity Editor

Published: Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 9:41 a.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 9:41 a.m.

How a story gets told, of course, depends on who's doing the telling. In the case of our still-leaking well in the Gulf of Mexico and the scale of ecological and economic damage the oil is causing, the differences in coverage and perception of the six-month deepwater drilling ban called for by the president are telling.

For weeks, the potential impact of the moratorium on jobs has dominated local television reports and the front pages of Louisiana papers.

And when the howls of local industry, legislators and media reached the echo chamber of the nation's news outlets, the message was received with some confusion, raised eyebrows and derision.

After President Obama stuck to plans for the moratorium during a televised address to the country Tuesday night, Lafourche Parish President Charlotte Randolph was interviewed by National Public Radio's Michele Norris.

Norris asked Randolph if she was “reassured” by the president's remarks.

Randolph said she was infuriated, adding that the drilling ban was a message that the people of south Louisiana aren't “worth the effort.”

“It'll be surprising to many people that you in the Gulf are actually in opposition to the moratorium,” Norris said. “The assumption would be perhaps that you would be calling for more safety regulations.”

I don't imagine Randolph's response did much to endear the rest of the country to the nuances of Louisiana's plight.

“There are safety regulations within the industry. They police themselves,” she said.

And despite congressional hearings showing four major oil companies' spill-response plans were as laughably deficient as BP's, Randolph also maintained the circumstances that caused the explosion and leak from the Macondo well are “not an industry-wide problem.”

One listener wondered if Randolph was a “spokesperson for BP or the Republican Party.”

Oil-and-gas exploration is conducted in comparatively few parts of this country.

And though Americans fill up their cars with refined petroleum and heat their homes with natural gas, the vast majority of people who don't live in oil-and-gas producing states lack a real grasp of the men and women who work to produce those essential products and the families and communities they support.

It's an industry that, not without some justification, is often a popular national villain, even as the country voraciously consumes what it produces.

That's why it's not hard to see why some people are flummoxed by Louisiana's simultaneous pleas for help fighting the spill and state leaders' insistence on being allowed to keep drilling deepwater wells like the one still spewing millions of gallons of crude.

Though some major news outlets have given thoughtful coverage to the state's intricate ties to the oilfield and the moratorium's potential economic impacts, others give the story — if they deal with it at all — a political angle, like this Washington Post blog headline: “Gulf Coast Republicans (and Charlie Melancon) want offshore drilling moratorium scrapped.”

Politicians who argue against the drilling ban are cast as lapdogs and apologists for the industry rather than advocates for communities facing economic crisis.

While many do in fact have campaign coffers lined with oil cash, that doesn't necessarily diminish their argument in this particular case. Most of us in south Louisiana, myself included, are directly or indirectly sustained by oil money simply because it sustains virtually everything.

But for many in the media, the spill, not the economic disaster the moratorium could cause, is still the story, illustrated by the sympathetic and easily relatable tale of the small-time fisherman versus Big Oil.

It's a valid story for sure, quickly digested by a national audience that may know little to nothing about the Gulf Coast, but it's only one of many facets to this mess.

Like it or not, the oil-and-gas industry has assumed a “too-big-to-fail” spot in the state's economy, accounting for a total economic impact of about $65 billion.

Even more than two decades after the oil bust of the 1980s, south Louisiana economies have largely failed to win any significant measure of independence from the oilfield. The industry directly supplies one out of every five jobs in Terrebonne and Lafourche and supports virtually everything else, from hotels and restaurants to local schools and government, in one way or another.

Deepwater drilling is the driving engine of that oilfield economy, and the rest of the nation deserves to hear a fair and accurate depiction of what the moratorium will mean for this hard-luck state.

Whether we'll get it remains to be seen.

New York Times reporter Felicity Barringer filed a blog post from Harbor Seafood and Oyster Bar in Venice Tuesday night, first noting that the “largely white” crowd was ignoring the presidential address, then interviewing a couple who disagreed with the moratorium.

“The trouble is that he shut everything down,” the husband said. “That's wrong. We need to move forward.”

There's no mention of the potential for job loss or the oil-and-gas industry's enormous economic footprint in the state.

There's just a quote from the man's wife, who suggested Obama used the speech to advance an environmental agenda and talk “about green things.”

And, as testament to the dangers of one-dimensional coverage, this is how one online reader reacted to Barringer's post:

“I cried for the people who live on the Gulf Coast, thinking about what their environment is losing to this disaster. Now that I know a hostile attitude is all the president is receiving, I have shed my last tear over it. I guess if they want to swim and fish in crude, it's their business,” the reader wrote.

City Editor Robert Zullo can be reached at 448-7614 or robert.zullo@houmatoday.com.

<p>How a story gets told, of course, depends on who's doing the telling. In the case of our still-leaking well in the Gulf of Mexico and the scale of ecological and economic damage the oil is causing, the differences in coverage and perception of the six-month deepwater drilling ban called for by the president are telling.</p><p>For weeks, the potential impact of the moratorium on jobs has dominated local television reports and the front pages of Louisiana papers.</p><p>And when the howls of local industry, legislators and media reached the echo chamber of the nation's news outlets, the message was received with some confusion, raised eyebrows and derision. </p><p>After President Obama stuck to plans for the moratorium during a televised address to the country Tuesday night, Lafourche Parish President Charlotte Randolph was interviewed by National Public Radio's Michele Norris.</p><p>Norris asked Randolph if she was “reassured” by the president's remarks.</p><p>Randolph said she was infuriated, adding that the drilling ban was a message that the people of south Louisiana aren't “worth the effort.”</p><p>“It'll be surprising to many people that you in the Gulf are actually in opposition to the moratorium,” Norris said. “The assumption would be perhaps that you would be calling for more safety regulations.”</p><p>I don't imagine Randolph's response did much to endear the rest of the country to the nuances of Louisiana's plight.</p><p>“There are safety regulations within the industry. They police themselves,” she said. </p><p>And despite congressional hearings showing four major oil companies' spill-response plans were as laughably deficient as BP's, Randolph also maintained the circumstances that caused the explosion and leak from the Macondo well are “not an industry-wide problem.”</p><p>One listener wondered if Randolph was a “spokesperson for BP or the Republican Party.”</p><p>Oil-and-gas exploration is conducted in comparatively few parts of this country.</p><p>And though Americans fill up their cars with refined petroleum and heat their homes with natural gas, the vast majority of people who don't live in oil-and-gas producing states lack a real grasp of the men and women who work to produce those essential products and the families and communities they support.</p><p>It's an industry that, not without some justification, is often a popular national villain, even as the country voraciously consumes what it produces.</p><p>That's why it's not hard to see why some people are flummoxed by Louisiana's simultaneous pleas for help fighting the spill and state leaders' insistence on being allowed to keep drilling deepwater wells like the one still spewing millions of gallons of crude. </p><p>Though some major news outlets have given thoughtful coverage to the state's intricate ties to the oilfield and the moratorium's potential economic impacts, others give the story — if they deal with it at all — a political angle, like this Washington Post blog headline: “Gulf Coast Republicans (and Charlie Melancon) want offshore drilling moratorium scrapped.”</p><p>Politicians who argue against the drilling ban are cast as lapdogs and apologists for the industry rather than advocates for communities facing economic crisis.</p><p>While many do in fact have campaign coffers lined with oil cash, that doesn't necessarily diminish their argument in this particular case. Most of us in south Louisiana, myself included, are directly or indirectly sustained by oil money simply because it sustains virtually everything.</p><p>But for many in the media, the spill, not the economic disaster the moratorium could cause, is still the story, illustrated by the sympathetic and easily relatable tale of the small-time fisherman versus Big Oil.</p><p>It's a valid story for sure, quickly digested by a national audience that may know little to nothing about the Gulf Coast, but it's only one of many facets to this mess.</p><p>Like it or not, the oil-and-gas industry has assumed a “too-big-to-fail” spot in the state's economy, accounting for a total economic impact of about $65 billion.</p><p>Even more than two decades after the oil bust of the 1980s, south Louisiana economies have largely failed to win any significant measure of independence from the oilfield. The industry directly supplies one out of every five jobs in Terrebonne and Lafourche and supports virtually everything else, from hotels and restaurants to local schools and government, in one way or another.</p><p>Deepwater drilling is the driving engine of that oilfield economy, and the rest of the nation deserves to hear a fair and accurate depiction of what the moratorium will mean for this hard-luck state.</p><p>Whether we'll get it remains to be seen.</p><p>New York Times reporter Felicity Barringer filed a blog post from Harbor Seafood and Oyster Bar in Venice Tuesday night, first noting that the “largely white” crowd was ignoring the presidential address, then interviewing a couple who disagreed with the moratorium.</p><p>“The trouble is that he shut everything down,” the husband said. “That's wrong. We need to move forward.”</p><p>There's no mention of the potential for job loss or the oil-and-gas industry's enormous economic footprint in the state.</p><p>There's just a quote from the man's wife, who suggested Obama used the speech to advance an environmental agenda and talk “about green things.”</p><p>And, as testament to the dangers of one-dimensional coverage, this is how one online reader reacted to Barringer's post: </p><p>“I cried for the people who live on the Gulf Coast, thinking about what their environment is losing to this disaster. Now that I know a hostile attitude is all the president is receiving, I have shed my last tear over it. I guess if they want to swim and fish in crude, it's their business,” the reader wrote.</p><p>City Editor Robert Zullo can be reached at 448-7614 or robert.zullo@houmatoday.com.</p>